Talk:Open Data License/Open Issues

What is the reason for license change

Reasons for a license change should be listed somewhere. I don't think they are convincing.

If your country protects databases by copyright, current licensing is fine. Maybe you should add clarifications (not license changes) explaining how cc-by-sa applies to database, but...

If your country does NOT protect databases by copyright... then you have pretty much lost. You can try to wrap the database in ugly click-through "agreement" but you can't tell if it is human above legal age clicking "yes" or if it is a cat. Anyone is then legaly able to redistribute the database... and you can sue the cat.

So, proposed licensing change is a lot of work (you have to re-negotiate database import) and it does not really prevent anything.

Now... I do not think that "U.S. company is going to take openstreetmap data, modify them and not share back" is realistic. First, you can still try to sue them. And second, if databases are not protected by copyright, you can just take their data without their permission.

The motives for the change are given on this blog post and on the Open Data License FAQ. With reference to comments about the license in non-EU territory then I suggest we need advice from qualified legal people. Can anyone help with that? PeterIto 17:05, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't believe that this is an 'open issue' and I propose to remove it unless people object. PeterIto 08:46, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

10 pages of ugly legaleese

So, instead of simply downloading the web, proposed "improvement" is to get me to agree to 10 pages of legaleese in foreign language. I don't think that's an improvement.

This appears to be a general comment rather than a relevant Open Issues. I propose to remove it soon. PeterIto 09:02, 6 March 2009 (UTC)